Bug 195815 - koffice: broken upgrade path from legacy to extras
Summary: koffice: broken upgrade path from legacy to extras
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: koffice
Version: 5
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Andreas Bierfert
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2006-06-18 07:34 UTC by Ville Skyttä
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:11 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-06-18 07:58:57 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Ville Skyttä 2006-06-18 07:34:24 UTC
Uncovered by the upgrade path checker script, koffice has a broken upgrade path
from FC3 legacy to FC4+ Extras:

koffice:
  3: 4:1.4.2-0.FC3.2 (FL3-updates)
  4: 0:1.5.1-1.fc4 (FE4)
  5: 0:1.5.1-1.fc5 (FE5)
  6: 0:1.5.1-1.fc6 (FE6)

Note the Epoch in legacy.

Comment 1 Andreas Bierfert 2006-06-18 07:58:57 UTC
from koffice.spec (FC4,FC5,devel):

%package suite
Summary:        A free, integrated office suite for KDE
Group:          Applications/Productivity
Obsoletes:      koffice <= 4:%{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes:      koffice-i18n < 4:%{version}


Comment 2 Ville Skyttä 2006-06-18 09:49:35 UTC
Doh, I knew that examining source packages only has its limitations, but koffice
appears to be the only package that currently triggers a false positive because
of that.  Sorry about the noise, will try to work around in the upgrade checker
script.

Comment 3 Andreas Bierfert 2006-06-18 09:55:41 UTC
No worries ;) better to have this here on a false positive then the other way
around.

Comment 4 David Eisenstein 2006-06-18 16:26:34 UTC
Ok...

	%package suite
	Summary:        A free, integrated office suite for KDE
	Group:          Applications/Productivity
	Obsoletes:      koffice <= 4:%{version}-%{release}
	Obsoletes:      koffice-i18n < 4:%{version}

So this nomenclature looks weird to me.  My understanding is that epoch takes
priority over packages versions-releases -- so that "product-0:9.9.9-1.2.3"
would naturally upgrade to "product-1:1.0.1-0.0.0".

If that is so ... then if you are obsoleting koffice <= 4:%{version}-%{release},
but all the FC4, FC5, rawhide versions of koffice are now at epoch 0, then it
won't matter at all *what* version you're upgrading koffice to, will it?

IN other words, unless I completely misunderstand how RPM specification
files work, it looks to me like this kind of "Obsoletes:" nomenclature
would have the effect of allowing one to have a binary built from this
spec:

	Name:           koffice
	Version:        1.5.1
	Release:        1.fc5
	...
	Obsoletes:      koffice <= 4:%{version}-%{release}
	Obsoletes:      koffice-i18n < 4:%{version}

to be "upgraded" (# rpm -Uvh) with a binary built from this spec:

	Name:           koffice
	Version:        1.4.2
	Release:        2.fc4
	...
	Obsoletes:      koffice <= 4:%{version}-%{release}
	Obsoletes:      koffice-i18n < 4:%{version}

Can someone try this and prove me wrong?

Comment 5 Ville Skyttä 2006-06-18 16:59:56 UTC
You're right, but missing the point that in FE4, FE5 or FEdevel there is no
*binary* package with the name koffice (they're koffice-suite, koffice-core,
...).  I missed that initially too.

Comment 6 Michael Schwendt 2006-06-18 18:25:48 UTC
No, wrong. That's an impossible upgrade. As soon as koffice-1.5.1-1.fc5
is installed, it also obsoletes koffice-1.4.2-2.fc4 and is seen as newer.
Note that it "Obsoletes: koffice <= 4:1.5.1-1.fc5", so EVR of a package
MUST be newer than that in order to be a valid upgrade.

But nevertheless, doing things like this with Epoch is ugly and nasty.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.